^lilijiliiiiiiliil 


4 


'^.'lo.'olA 


-^ 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


** 


% 


Ly 


Presented    bT^ro-  ~S~S) .  \)  .  C^.Ax  <$j  \  O  ,^  ."D . 


Division 
Section 


-Jl^-^f^rv^.    '^^  .  ^^^ 


THEOLOGICAL   EDUCATION   vVND   ITS   NEEDS. 

Theological  education  has  jDassed  througli  several  stages  of 
development  since  the  Eeformation.  In  the  early  Church  the  most 
distinguished  theologians  were  trained  in  the  Greek  universities.  The 
Christian  catechetical  school  at  Alexandria  was  established  at  the 
close  of  the  second  century,  the  most  famous  heads  of  which  were 
Clement  and  Origen.  The  school  of  Antioch  was  founded  at  the  close 
of  the  third  century,  eminent  members  of  which  were  Chrysostom, 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  and  Nestorius.  The  school  at  Edessa  was 
founded  by  Ephra^m,  and  it  became  a  fountain  of  blessing  to  the 
Syrian  Church.  In  Western  EurojDe  from  the  earliest  times,  theologi- 
cal education  was  given  in  diocesan  schools  and  then  subsequently  in 
monasteries  during  the  greater  part  of  the  Middle  Ages  until  the 
establishment  of  the  great  universities,  when  the  theological  faculty 
became  the  leading  faculty  in  them. 

I.  Theological  Education   Since  the  Eeformation. 

The  Eeformation  was  led  by  scholars  trained  in  the  universities. 
The  chief  reformers  became  professors  in  the  universities  which 
passed  from  the  control  of  the  Church  under  the  control  of  the  State. 
Theological  education  in  Europe  has  been  chiefly  conducted  through 
the  theological  faculties  of  the  universities  until  the  present  time. 
There  have  been  diocesan  schools  and  provincial  seminaries  of  vari- 
ous kinds,  but  these  have  been  supplementary  to  the  universities  and 
designed  chiefly  for  the  training  for  the  ministry  of  those  who  for 
various  reasons  were  unable  to  pursue  the  course  of  theology  at  the 
universities  or  in  the  interest  of  parties  in  the  churches.  In  all  the 
national  churches  of  Protestant  Europe  the  normal  theological  educa- 
tion is  carried  on  at  the  universities. 

When  the  non-conformists  were  excluded  from  the  universities  of 
Oxford  and  Cambridge,  they  were  obliged  to  establish  training-schools 
of  their  own.  They  followed  the  model  of  the  national  universities 
and  gave  the  entire  range  of  instruction  so  far  as  they  were  able, 


..>  ■.\       •  ■      '  •'  ■  --^  ■■  ■■    ^    *'    •-'  y 

academic,  collegiate,  and  professional,  in  one  ifistitution.  This  has 
continued  to  be  their  method  until  the  present  time.  Mansfield  Col- 
lege when  it  removed  from  Birmingham  to  Oxford  threw  ofE  all  the 
preparatory  studies  and  transformed  itself  into  a  strictly  professional 
school ;  but  it  ejitered  at  the  same  time  into  such  friendly  relations 
with  the  university  of  Oxford,  that  it  gained  many  of  the  advantages 
of  a  theological  faculiy,  independent  of,  but  working  in  harmony 
with,  the  other  faculties  of  a  great  national  university. 

The  early  American  ministers  were  trained  at  the  British  univer- 
sities, chiefly  at  Cambridge  and  Glasgow.  When  our  colleges  were 
established,  they  followed  British  models  and  gave  theological  educa- 
tion as  well  as  classical  education.  Harvard,  Yale,  and  Princeton  had 
their  theological  professors  and  their  Hebrew  professors,  and  tlieolog- 
ical  education  was  included  in  their  curricula. 

Theological  seminaries  as  such  belong  to  the  present  century,  and 
they  have  had  their  chief  development  in  America,  in  connection  with 
zeal  for  denominationalisni  and  the  desire  to  perpetuate  the  tenets  of 
certain  parties  in  the  churches.  It  is  significant  from  this  point  of 
view  that  the  first  theological  schools  established  in  America  were  the 
result  of  religious  controversy.  In  1782  the  Associate  Presbyteries 
and  the  Keformed  Presbyteries  united  in  the  Associate  Eeformed 
Synod.  But  there  was  a  considerable  number  who  refused  the  union. 
Some  of  these  constituted  the  Associate  Synod  and  organized  a  theo- 
logical school  at  Beaver,  Pa.,  in  1794.  The  Associate  Keformed 
Svnod  founded  a  theological  seminary  in  New  York  in  1804. 

The  two  great  parties  into  which  New  England  Congregationalism 
was  divided,  the  so-called  consistent  Calvinists  and  the  moderate  Cal- 
vinists,  each  had  in  mind  the  establishment  of  a  theological  school. 
The  theological  instruction  at  Harvard  under  Dr.  Henry  Ware  was 
Unitarian  and  this  urged  the  orthodox  to  establish  orthodox  schools 
as  soon  as  possible.  Happily  the  two  parties  united  in  the  Andover 
creed  of  1808  and  both  were  satisfactorily  represented  in  the  faculty. 

The  efforts  for  union  of  kindred  denominations  at  the  close  of  the 
eighteenth  century  having  failed,  denominationalisni  entered  upon  an 
ambitious  career  and  each  ecclesiastical  party  sought  a  rallying  point 
in  a  theological  seminary.  The  Dutch  Reformed  Church  established 
their  seminary  at  New  Brunswick,  N.  J.,  in  1810,  under  John  H.  Liv- 
ingston; the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  founded 
their  seminary  at  Princeton  in  1812,  under  Archibald  Alexander; 
the  General  Convention  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  estab- 
42 


630  TBEOLOGICAL   EDUCATION  AND   ITS  NEEDS. 

lishcJ  their  seminary  in  New  York  in  1817;  the  Baptists  planted 
a  seminary  at  Hamilton,  N.  Y.,  in  1819;  the  German  lieformed  semi- 
nary was  organized  in  1825 ;  the  Lutheran  at  Gettysburg,  Pa.,  in  1826 ; 
the  Methodists  did  not  organize  a  theological  school  until  1847.  On 
the  basis  of  these  institutions,  a  large  number  of  denominational 
theological  seminaries  have  grown  up  from  time  to  time  in  the  pro- 
gress of  religion  in  America.  These  theological  schools  have  been 
entirely  professional  in  their  character,  standing  apart  from  the  col- 
leges and  the  universities  and  having  an  independent  life  and  devel- 
opment. They  have  become  denominational  centres  and  the  rallying 
points  of  parties  in  the  denominations.  The  colleges  and  the  univer- 
sities have  for  the  most  part  given  over  theology  to  the  theological 
schools  and  have  unfolded  their  courses  of  study  without  regard  to  the 
science  of  theology.  So  far  have  they  gone  in  this  direction  that 
many  colleges  train  students  away  from  the  ministry  instead  of  pre- 
paring them  for  the  theological  seminary. 

Harvard  and  Yale,  the  earliest  of  the  American  institutions  of 
learning,  were  caught  in  the  sweep  of  the  nev\''  movement.  But  hap- 
pily they  did  not  discard  theolog}^,  but  organized  it  into  separate 
faculties,  Harvard  in  1815,  and  Yale  in  1822,  giving  it  independent 
life  and  development;  so  that,  while  the  colleges  were  frequented  by 
students  of  all  denominations,  the  Harvard  theological  school  became 
known  as  Unitarian  and  the  Yale  theological  school  as  Congregational. 
It  is  quite  evident,  however,  that  both  have  been  so  influenced  by  the 
universities  to  which  they  have  been  attached  that  they  have  not 
been  so  denominational  as  the  theological  seminaries  that  stood  alone 
by  themselves,  under  the  direct  influence  of  the  denominations.  Thus 
the  Harvard  theological  school,  which  is  unjustly  put  under  the  ban 
as  Unitarian,  has  in  its  faculty  a  Baptist  and  a  Congregationalist. 
And  the  Yale  divinity  school  has  ever  been  renowned  for  its  breadth 
and  catholicit}'. 

In  recent  times  there  has  been  a  reaction  against  the  isolation  of 
theological  seminaries  as  merely  professional  schools.  The  Methodists 
with  their  great  practical  sense  have  never  taken  kindly  to  them. 
The  wonderful  progress  of  Methodism  was  made  without  any  theolog- 
ical seminaries  whatever.  But  few  Methodist  ministers  leceive  their 
theological  training  in  them  at  the  present  time.  Their  Concord  Bibli- 
cal Institute  was  removed  to  Boston,  to  become  a  part  of  the  Boston 
University,  and  their  Garret  Biblical  Institute  was  adopted  as  the  theo- 
logical department  of  the  North-Western  University.    The  new  Chicago 


THEOLOGICAL  EDUCATION  AND  ITS  NEEDS.  637 

University  is  designed  to  grow  up  about  the  Baptist  theological  semin- 
ary at  Morgan  Park.  Some  may  object  that  these  theological  schools  of 
the  Methodists  and  the  Baptists  are  parts  of  denominational  universi- 
ties and  therefore  dominated  by  strictly  sectarian  interests.  But  even 
if  this  be  so,  the  university  connection  overcomes  in  a  measure  the 
evils  of  theological  isolation. 

We  shall  now  call  attention  to  the  same  general  movement  in  con- 
nection with  theological  schools  of  denominations  differing  from  those 
which  are  regarded  as  controlling  the  college  or  university  with  which 
they  are  affiliated. 

At  Cambridge,  Mass.,  there  is  an  Episcopal  theological  school, 
founded  in  1867,  which  is  not  in  organic  connection  with  Harvard 
University,  but  which  is  in  such  friendly  relations  that  the  faculty  and 
students  have  many  of  the  advantages  of  the  great  university.  It  has 
also  been  proposed  to  remove  Andover  Seminary  to  Cambridge,  in 
order  to  share  in  these  advantages.  Many  think  that  this  would  be  a 
wise  step,  even  if  half  the  endowments  were  forfeited.  The  Episcopal 
Divinity  School  in  Philadelphia  is  in  friendly  relations  with  the  Uni- 
versity of  Pennsylvania. 

The  Union  Theological  Seminary  in  New  York  was  founded  under 
interesting  circumstances,  two  years  before  the  great  disruption  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States.  The  design  of  the  found- 
ers was  thus  explained: 

•'It  is  the  design  of  the  founders  to  provide  a  theological  semicaiy  in  the 
midst  of  the  greatest  and  most  growing  community  in  America,  around  which 
all  men  of  modei'ate  views  and  feelings,  who  desire  to  live  free  from  party  strife, 
and  to  stand  aloof  from  all  extreines  of  doctrinal  speculation,  practical  radicalism, 
and  ecclesiastical  domination,  may  cordially  and  affectionately  rally." 

It  received  the  name  of  Union  Tlieological  Seminary,  and  in  its  his- 
tory it  has  ever  been  true  to  that  ideal.  Its  directors  and  faculty 
were  the  leaders  in  the  reunion  of  the  Presbyterian  Church.  They 
are  at  the  present  time  leading  the  way  in  the  direction  of  a  larger 
reunion  of  Christendom,  and  are  in  sympathy  with  all  that  is  large  and 
broad  and  solid  in  Christian  theology  and  Christian  life.  Union  Sem- 
inary has  recently  entered  into  relations  of  courtesy  with  Columbia 
College  and  with  the  University  of  New  York.  These  relations  are 
thus  expressed  in  the  annual  catalogue : 

"  These  university  courses  by  the  covu-tesy  of  the  institutions  offering  them, 
are  open  to  such  students  of  the  Seminary  as  are  recommended  by  the  Faculty. 
Recommendations  will  be  given  only  to  students  of  superior  scholarship,  and 


638  THEOLOGICAL  EDUCATION  AND  ITS  NEEDS. 

only  on  the  condition  tliat  these  special  university  courses  shall  not  interfere 
with  the  regular  work  appointed  by  the  Seminary. 

"By  terms  of  agreement  between  the  Seminary  and  tiie  University  of  the 
City  of  New  York,  the  Univei'sity  '  will  admit  witiiout  fee  to  special  lectures  in 
the  Graduate  Division,  and  also,  with  the  consent  of  the  Professor  occupying  the 
chair  concerned,  to  other  lectures  in  the  Department  of  Arts  and  Sciences, 
students  of  the  Seminary  recommended  by  the  Faculty  of  the  Seminary. ' 

"According  to  an  agreement  with  Columbia  College,  permission  is  granted 
to  students  duly  recommended,  '  in  such  number  as  ma^'  be  approved  by  the 
President  of  tlie  College,  to  attend  the  lectures  delivered  in  the  School  of  Political 
Science  on  Political  Economy  and  Sociology,  and  the  lectures  in  the  School  of 
Arts,  on  the  Semitic  Languages,  Philosopiiy  and  Ethics,  without  the  payment  of 
fees.' " 

The  same  terms  were  offered  at  the  same  time  to  the  General  Theo- 
logical Seminary  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church.  These  are 
doubtless  the  beginnings  of  a  more  extended  movement. 

We  have  thus  traced  three  stages  of  development  in  theological 
education  in  America:  (1)  as  a  part  of  the  college,  (2)  as  an  indepen- 
dent professional  school,  (3)  as  an  independent  school  in  friendly 
alliance  with  the  university. 

11.  Advantages  and  Disadvantages  of  Theological 
Seminaries. 

"We  are  now  prepared  to  consider  some  of  the  advantages  and  dis- 
advantages that  have  sprung  out  of  theological  seminaries. 

1 .  The  Isolation  of  Theology. — Great  advantages  have  arisen  from  the 
organization  of  theological  seminaries  as  separate  institutions.  The- 
ological education  has  made  rapid  strides  forward.  In  the  olden  time 
two  professors  in  the  colleges,  the  Theological  professor  and  the 
Hebrew  professor,  were  deemed  sufficient  for  theological  instruction. 
In  the  seminaries  it  has  so  increased  as  to  make  a  full  course  of  three 
years  and  a  supplementary  course  for  graduates  who  are  able  to  pur- 
sue it.  The  chairs  of  instruction  have  increased  so  as  to  represent 
the  four  great  divisions  of  Theology,  Exegetical,  Historical,  Syste- 
matic, and  Practical ;  and  Exegetical  theology  has  been  divided  be- 
tween the  Old-Testament  Professor  and  the  New-Testament  Professor. 
The  older  Dogmatic  professor  has  been  put  between  the  professor  of 
Biblical  Theology  and  the  prof essor  of  Apologetics;  and  Polemic  The- 
ology hag  in  the  best  institutions  yielded  the  field  to  Christian  Sym- 
bolics. A  study  of  the  catalogues  shows  the  improvements  that  have 
been  made,  especially  in  recent  years. 

The  course  in  theology  is  still  very  defective  in  the  great  majority 


THEOLOGICAL   EDUCATION   AND   ITS   NEEDS.  639 

of  the  theological  schools,  and  is  still  far  from  perfection  even  in  those 
most  richly  endowed  and  manned;  but  no  one  can  deny  real  and 
great  progress.  There  are  few  seminaries  which  give  instruction  in 
Theological  Encyclopeedia,  that  general  survey  of  the  field  of  theology 
which  is  important  to  introduce  the  student  into  his  studies  and  give 
him  a  general  idea  of  the  work  before  him.  There  are  few  which 
teach  Symbolics,  that  important  theological  discipline  which  compares 
the  official  confessions,  creeds,  and  catechisms  in  order  to  determine 
the  faith  of  the  several  denominations  and  accurately  state  their  con- 
cord and  discord ;  a  work  which  is  of  incalculable  importance  in  the 
advance  towards  Christian  unity.  There  are  few  which  teach  Biblical 
Theology,  that  science  which  gives  the  theology  of  the  Bible  itself 
in  its  historic  formation,  as  distinguished  from  the  theology  of  the 
creeds  and  the  theology  of  the  theologians.  There  are  few  which 
teach  the  history  of  dogma  and  show  the  gradual  evolution  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine  under  the  guidance  of  the  divine  Spirit  through  the 
Christian  centuries.  There  are  few  which  teach  Religious  Philosophy 
and  Comparative  Religion,  sciences  of  great  importance  in  order  to 
show  the  origin  and  development  of  religion  in  man,  and  the  history 
of  religions  in  our  world;  for  upon  the  right  understanding  of  the 
essential  principles  of  religion  and  of  that  which  the  great  religions 
have  in  common,  depends  our  appreciation  of  the  distinctive  principles 
of  Christianity,  and  a  clear  insight  into  the  real  missionary  work  of 
the  Church.  There  are  few  which  teach  Christian  Ethics,  the  science 
of  holy  conduct,  for  they  have  been  content  wdth  a  college  education, 
usually  very  defective,  in  so-called  Moral  Philosophy.  There  are  few 
which  teach  in  any  comprehensive  and  scientific  manner  the  evolution 
of  Christian  Institutions,  or  pay  proper  attention  to  Christian  Art, 
Christian  Architecture,  Christian  Song,  and  Christian  Liturgy.  There 
are  few  which  give  any  sufficient  attention  to  the  English  Bible  and 
the  practical  exposition  of  Holy  Scripture  to  the  Christian  people. 
These  and  many  other  things  demand  more  attention  in  our  theolog- 
ical schools. 

The  backbone  of  theological  training  is  still  Hebrew  Exegesis, 
Greek  Exegesis,  Church  History,  Systematic  Theology,  Pastoral  The- 
ology and  Homiletics,  and  these  too  often  with  limited  range  and  in 
crude,  mechanical,  and  unfruitful  methods.  The  scientific  method  is 
beginning  to  revolutionize  theological  education ;  but  this  movement 
is  only  in  its  beginnings.  It  can  make  progress  only  through  great 
and  bitter  theological  conflict,  owing  to  the  opposition  of  conserva- 


640  THEOLOGICAL  EDUCATION  AND   ITS  NEEDS. 

tives  to  any  and  every  iii)2)rovement  in  methods  and  scope  of  instruc- 
tion, and  also  on  account  of  the  few  teachers  who  are  properly  quali- 
fied for  the  work. 

It  will  be  evident  to  any  one  who  has  carefully  considered  the 
subject  and  who  aims  to  improve  theological  education  in  our  country, 
that  that  improvement  can  come  only  by  single-hearted  devotion  to 
theology  as  a  science,  as  an  important  section  of  universal  knowledge ; 
in  other  words,  as  a  part  of  the  university  course.  Theology  has  shut 
herself  off  from  her  sister  sciences  in  America  during  the  present 
century,  and  has  paid  the  penalty  in  well-merited  neglect  by  the 
learned  men  of  other  departments  of  knowledge.  Theology  is  the 
queen  of  the  sciences,  but  she  can  reign  only  in  the  university.  She 
dethrones  herself  when  she  retires  by  herself  into  the  theological 
school.  Theology  in  Europe  is  far  ahead  of  theology  in  America, 
because  it  is  in  the  full  stream  of  university  life,  whereas  in  America, 
isolated  in  theological  halls,  under  the  domination  for  the  most  part 
of  the  conservatives  in  the  denominations,  it  has  lagged  behind  in 
the  development  of  other  branches  of  human  learning. 

2.  The  Minislry^s  Need  of  Better  University  Education. — Theological 
training  in  theological  seminaries  has  had  the  advantage  of  giving  the 
ministry  as  a  class  a  higher  professional  education  than  they  could 
have  had  in  the  colleges,  because  theological  students  were  gathered 
apart  by  themselves  to  devote  themselves  to  a  professional  career ;  but 
this  has  had  the  disadvantage  of  training  them  away  from  their  col- 
lege-mates in  other  professions,  and  has  alienated  them  from  the  pro- 
gress made  in  the  other  departments  of  learning.  If  one  compares  the 
theological  education  given  at  Oxford  and  Cambridge  with  the  educa- 
tion given  in  the  theological  halls  of  the  Free  Church  of  Scotland  in 
Edinburgh  and  Glasgow,  he  will  be  astonished  at  the  immense  ad- 
vance of  the  purely  professional  school  over  the  universities  in  the 
department  of  theology;  and  yet  it  cannot  be  said  that  these  theolog- 
ical halls  have  been  more  fruitful  in  great  preachers  and  theological 
writers  than  the  English  universities.  It  should  be  stated,  however, 
that  only  a  small  portion  of  the  clergy  of  the  Church  of  England  are 
educated  at  the  universities,  while  almost  all  the  ministers  of  the  Free 
Churches  of  Scotland  are  trained  in  tlieological  hails.  The  reason 
of  it  has  often  come  before  our  mind,  in  conversation  with  representa- 
tives of  these  institutions.  The  strength  of  the  English  clergyman 
who  ha-s  been  trained  in  the  university  is  that  he  is  in  fellowship  with 
the  men  of  learning  of  his  university.     lie  is  in  sympathy  with  the 


THEOLOGICAL  EDUCATION  AND  ITS  NEEDS.  641 

entire  range  of  human  culture.  The  other  professions  are  interested 
in  theology  and  the  clergyman  is  interested  in  the  other  professions. 
They  develop  in  harmony  and  in  mutual  sympathy  and  help.  This 
is  in  a  measure  true  of  the  minister  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  who  is 
trained  in  tlie  national  universities,  as  compared  with  the  minister  of 
the  Free  Church  trained  in  the  theological  hall.  The  theological 
training  in  the  free  colleges  is  much  more  extensive  and  thorough, 
and  yet  we  do  not  find  the  difference  in  the  ministry  that  one  might 
expect  under  the  circumstances.  There  is  such  great  advantage  in 
the  university  connection  that  it  counterbalances  the  advantage  of  the 
improved  curriculum  and  greater  force  of  teachers  in  the  theological 
schools.  If  there  is  any  way  in  which  we  may  combine  the  advan- 
tages of  an  independent  theological  school  with  the  advantages  of  a 
university  connection,  v/e  shall  enter  upon  a  new  era  of  theological 
education. 

Into  this  new  era,  it  seems,  we  are  now  entering  by  the  connections 
established  between  theological  seminaries  and  universities  in  Boston 
and  Philadelphia,  New  York  and  Chicago,  as  well  as  in  the  old  uni- 
versities of  Harvard  and  Yale ;  and  in  the  friendly  relations  between 
Mansfield  College  and  the  Manchester  New  College  and  the  University 
of  Oxford.  The  educational  movement  now  in  progress  in  Scotland 
will  also  doubtless  result  in  giving  the  theological  halls  of  the  Free 
Church  and  the  United  Presbyterian  Church  university  advantages. 
These  university  connections  enable  the  students  of  theology  now  in 
the  seminaries  to  keep  in  touch  with  all  the  professions  and  to  move 
with  the  general  currents  of  human  thought.  We  may  hope  from 
this  friendly  intercourse  that  the  hostility  between  science  and  relig- 
ion, philosophy  and  theology,  may  pass  away,  and  that  theology 
itself  may  expand  with  the  appropriation  of  fresh  material  from  all 
departments  of  human  investigation. 

3.  The  Laymen's  Need  of  Theological  Education. — There  is  a  certain  ad- 
vantage in  the  separation  of  candidates  for  the  ministry  and  their  isola- 
tion from  men  of  other  callings  in  life.  It  makes  a  homogeneous  body 
of  men  who  have  consecrated  themselves  to  the  service  of  Christ  in  the 
work  of  the  Christian  ministry.  There  is  more  unity  and  enthusiasm 
in  work  among  them  which  comes  from  specialization.  But  there  is  a 
very  serious  disadvantage  also  in  excluding  from  theological  training- 
men  of  other  callings  in  life.  It  is  a  very  remarkable  evolution  in 
American  religious  life  that  while  the  layman  has  been  raised  to  an 
equality  with  the  minister  in    the  government  of  the  church,  lay- 


642  THEOLOGICAL   EDUCATION  AND   ITS  NEEDS. 

men  have  been  excluded  from  theological  training  in  our  seminaries, 
and  deprived  of  the  opportunity  of  securing  the  education  that  thej 
need  to  really  make  them  equal  with  their  ministers.  In  the  previous 
centuries  they  could  study  theology  in  the  colleges  and  universities 
alongside  of  the  ministry.  So  now  in  the  universities  of  Europe 
they  may  freely  study  theology.  But  in  our  theological  seminaries  it 
has  been  a  common  rule  that  all  but  candidates  for  the  ministry 
should  be  rigidly  excluded.  Thus  we  have  gained  the  position  where 
the  ministry  are  highly  trained  in  theology,  but  the  elders,  vestry- 
men, deacons,  and  other  leaders  in  the  practical  work  of  the  Church 
are  without  training  in  theology.  It  is  not  strange  under  such  cir- 
cumstances that  many  of  the  ministry  should  feel  that  they  are  trained 
far  above  the  understanding  of  the  people,  and  that  it  should  be  so 
difficult  for  the  theological  student  when  he  goes  forth  from  the  theo- 
logical school  to  bring  his  mind  into  sympathy  with  the  people. 

Theological  education  should  be  free,  ojjen  to  any  man  or  woman 
who  has  sufficient  elementary  training  to  pursue  these  studies.  The 
Church  at  the  present  time  needs  laymen  who  are  trained  in  theology. 
It  is  not  necessary  that  these  should  undergo  the  entire  course  of 
training  that  ministers  undergo,  but  it  should  be  open  to  those  prop- 
erly qualified,  so  that  they  may  pursue  those  studies  that  seem  to 
them  important  for  their  work  in  life.  The  new  departure  of  Union 
Theological  Seminary  in  New  York,  in  opening  its  studies  to  graduate 
students  of  Columbia  College  and  the  University  of  New  York,  makes 
it  possible  for  lawyers,  physicians,  and  teachers  and  others  who  desire 
theological  training  to  secure  it  in  an  institution  already  established 
where  there  are  many  courses  of  study  suitable  for  the  purpose.  It 
will  be  the  inevitable  result  of  this  policy  that  new  courses  will  be 
established  which  will  be  appropriate  for  students  of  this  class. 
Doubtless  those  other  theological  seminaries  which  have  university 
connection,  will  ere  long  open  their  courses  of  instruction  in  a  similar 
way,  if  they  have  not  already  done  so.  And  thus  once  more  theology 
will  enter  into  the  circle  of  the  sciences  and  take  her  proper  place — ■ 
giving  and  receiving  unspeakable  benefits. 

The  professions  are  more  interwoven  than  they  used  to  be.  There 
are  important  points  of  contact  between  ecclesiastical  and  civil  law 
which  both  lawyer  and  minister  should  know.  There  are  important 
connections  between  medicine  and  theology  which  physician  and 
pastor  should  understand,  in  order  to  harmonious  action  in  those  cases 
where  disease  of  body  and.  disease  of  soul  are  blended.     By  the  co- 


THEOLOGICAL   EDUCATION  AND  ITS  NEEDS.  643 

operation  of  the  faculties  of  instruction  through  the  medium  of  a  great 
university,  all  this  instruction  can  be  given  with  economy  and  with 
propriety,  and  the  professions  will  be  improved  by  mutual  acquaint- 
ance. Theology  has  much  to  learn  from  law  and  medicine  and  she 
has  favors  to  bestow  in  return. 

III.  Theological  Education  and  the  Public. 

Theological  education  has  also  an  important  relation  to  the  public. 
All  education  should  aim  at  the  public  welfare.  Much  more  should 
theological  education  keep  in  mind  the  religious  needs  of  the  people. 
It  is  evident  that  the  Church  needs  for  its  work  something  more  than 
an  educated  ministry.  It  needs  ministers  trained  to  the  highest  de- 
gree of  excellence.  But  it  also  needs  men  who  have  no  more  theolog- 
ical training  than  is  necessary  to  enable  them  to  work  efficiently  in 
very  humble  spheres. 

1.  Education  of  Lay  Evangelists. — The  history  of  the  Methodist  Epis- 
copal Church,  the  experience  of  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church, 
and  the  practice  of  the  Salvation  Army  show  that  there  must  be  a 
theological  education  of  an  army  of  men  and  women  far  beyond  the 
capacity  of  all  of  our  theological  schools  as  they  are  now  constituted. 
The  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  Churches  forfeited  the  suprem- 
acy of  America  by  insisting  upon  a  highly  educated  ministry  and  by 
neglecting  to  train  men  of  lower  grades  for  Christian  service.  These 
churches  committed  no  error  when  they  insisted  upon  a  learned  minis- 
try, but  they  did  commit  a  grave  error  when  they  neglected  to  provide 
an  additional  ministry  for  the  people,  of  men  less  highly  trained.  The 
Methodist  and  Cumberland  Presbyterians  did  noble  service  and  reaped 
well-earned  rewards,  when  they  sent  forth  evangelists  with  quite  mod- 
erate training  into  the  vineyard  to  do  the  work  no  others  could  do. 

The  demands  for  Christian  preachers  and  teachers,  at  the  present 
time,  are  vastly  in  excess  of  any  other  period  of  the  world's  history. 
The  evangelization  of  our  cities,  of  our  outlj-ing  populations,  and  of 
the  heathen  world  is  the  greatest  religious  problem  of  our  time. 
We  need  an  enormous  army  of  evangelists  for  this  task.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  train  them  all  in  the  theological  courses  of  our  seminaries. 
We  must  either  have  new  institutions  established  for  the  purpose,  or 
our  theological  seminaries  should  have  sufficient  elasticity  to  adapt 
themselves  to  the  work.  No  one  can  be  more  earnest  than  we  are  to 
climb  to  the  highest  reaches  of  Christian  theology  and  to  expand  the 


644  THEOLOGICAL   EDUCATION  AND   ITS  NEEDS. 

theological  course  and  lengthen  it  and  perfect  it  in  every  way  for 
those  who  are  able  to  pursue  it.  But  at  the  same  time,  we  think  that 
the  theological  seminary  owes  a  duty  to  the  public;  that  it  should  do 
a  work  for  the  lowest  as  well  as  the  highest ;  and  that  it  may  rise  all 
the  better  to  the  loftiest  aims,  if  it  is  open-minded  and  large-hearted 
enough  to  consider  the  needs  of  the  Christian  people.  It  is  better  to 
do  all  this  work  through  one  great  theological  institution  than  to 
undertake  to  establish  several  institutions  with  special  ends  in  view. 
A  thet^logical  seminary  in  New  York  properly  equipped,  might  train 
all  the  Christian  workers  that  are  needed  for  our  churches,  laymen  as 
well  as  ministers.  An  increase  of  teachers  and  endowments  would  be 
needed,  but  this  would  be  more  economical  and  fruitful  than  the  erec- 
tion of  feeble  supplementary  institutions. 

The  theological  seminary  should  follow  the  example  of  our  best 
colleges  and  grow  in  all  directions,  expanding  and  reaching  upward, 
and  at  the  same  time  striking  its  roots  downwards  as  a  true  tree  of 
life,  to  feed  the  people  of  God. 

2.  Tic:  Work  of  Theology  in  University  Extension. — The  universities 
have  learned  that  they  owe  a  duty  to  the  whole  community.  When 
the  American  colleges  and  universities  failed  to  understand  the  signs 
of  the  times,  the  Chautauqua  movement  showed  by  its  rapid  progress 
and  its  enormous  expansion  that  the  people  demanded  some  at  least 
of  the  education  that  the  colleges  had  been  retaining  for  certain  classes 
in  the  community.  The  English  universities  have  seen  the  impor- 
tance of  the  movement  and  have  organized  university-extension  courses 
with  beneficial  results.  Some  of  our  American  colleges  have  com- 
bined in  a  similar  movement.  The  theological  seminaries  have  a  duty 
in  the  same  direction.  Theology  is  for  the  people  as  well  as  for  the 
ministry.  There  has  been  no  time  since  the  seventeeth  century  in 
which  the  people  are  so  much  interested  in  theological  problems  as  at 
the  present  time.  Our  theological  seminaries,  especially  those  situated 
in  the  great  cities,  should  arrange  courses  of  lectures  and  training 
classes  for  the  public  instruction  of  men  and  women  in  theology-  The 
theological  seminaries  may  vastly  increase  their  usefulness  by  enter- 
ing into  this  field.  Doubtless  an  increased  number  of  teachers  would 
be  required,  but  it  would  be  more  economical  and  more  fruitful  in 
good  results,  to  furnish  them  for  the  institutions  already  established 
and  to  use  with  them  the  teachers  and  the  buildings,  and  the  appara- 
tus already  in  existence.  It  may  have  a  wholesome  effect  upon  pro- 
fessors and  students  if  they  should  thereby  be  brought  into  closer 


THEOLOGICAL   EDUCATION  AND  ITS  NEEDS.  U.o 

contact  with  the  Christian  public.  Any  tendency  to  undue  specula- 
tion and  theorizing  would  be  overcome  by  the  demands  of  the  people 
for  plain  and  practical  instruction. 

8.  Practical  Training  in  Christian  Work. — One  of  the  most  whole- 
some effects  of  the  establishment  of  theological  seminaries  in  great 
cities  is  the  combination  of  practical  with  theoretical  training.  Theo- 
logical students  are  thereby  brought  into  connection  with  the  practi- 
cal work  in  missions  and  charities  and  religious  work  of  all  kinds. 
They  see  the  best  methods,  they  engage  in  the  most  efficient  enter- 
prises, they  hear  the  ablest  preachers  and  lecturers,  and  become  famil- 
iar with  the  entire  practical  work  of  the  Church.  They  learn  about 
men  of  every  kindred  and  tongue  and  country.  Their  mind  and  their 
sympathies  are  enlarged.  The  religious  work  of  a  great  city  is  to  the 
theological  student  what  hospitals  are  to  the  medical  student,  and  the 
courts  of  justice  are  to  the  law  student.  It  is  true  there  is  peril  here 
that  the  practical  work  with  its  pressing  claims  may  withdraw  atten- 
tion from  tlie  theoretical  training.  But  the  peril  has  to  be  confronted 
by  the  minister,  and  the  sooner  he  faces  the  difficulty  under  the  ad- 
vice of  competent  instructors  and  overcomes  it,  the  better  for  him. 
It  is  one  of  the  most  important  lessons  in  life  he  has  to  learn,  to  so 
marry  precept  and  practice  that  divorce  will  forever  after  become 
'.mpossible. 

It  will  be  evident  to  those  who  have  followed  the  exposition  that 
has  been  given  of  the  history  of  theological  education,  the  advantages 
and  the  disadvantages  of  the  past  methods  and  the  suggestions  that 
have  been  made  as  to  new  methods,  that  theological  education  is  very 
far  from  its  ideal.  Much  needs  to  be  done  in  order  that  theology 
may  take  its  proper  position  in  the  university,  may  do  its  duty  in  the 
training  of  evangelists,  and  may  give  the  Christian  people  that  theo- 
logical education  which  they  need.  But  if  the  Christian  public  will 
unite  with  Christian  scholars  and  undertake  the  task,  many  things 
that  seem  difficult  and  even  impossible  now  will  be  accom.plished 
without  strain  and  with  the  most  excellent  results. 

C.  A,  Briggs. 


PENSIONS  :   TIME   TO   CALL   A   HALT. 

The  pension  question  is  attracting  great  attention  throughout  the 
country,  and  the  veterans  of  the  war  are  taking  an  active  part  in  the 
discussion  of  it.  Their  views  differ  widely.  On  last  Decoration  Day, 
a  gentleman  who  was  an  officer  of  volunteers  during  the  war  and  is 
now  a  civil  officer  of  the  State  of  New  York,  in  a  public  address 
declared  that  the  Government  had  been  so  mean  and  penurious  in  its 
treatment  of  its  defenders,  that  he  could  see  no  remedy  except  by  the 
formation  of  a  Soldiers'  Party  which  should  demand  justice  for  the 
veterans.  On  the  other  hand,  soldiers  in  some  parts  of  the  country 
have  organized  societies  to  oppose  the  further  increase  of  the  pension 
roll,  and  to  protest  against  representations  made  to  the  effect  that  the 
veterans  are  clamorous  for  more  pensions.  They  declare  that  such 
statements  are  libels  on  a  class  of  patriotic  men  and  are  calculated  to 
rob  them  of  the  good  name  to  which  they  are  entitled,  and  to  deprive 
them  of  the  high  place  as  brave  and  patriotic  men  which  would  other- 
wise be  accorded  to  them  by  coming  generations. 

"Which  side  is  right?  To  aid  us  in  deciding  this  question,  let  us 
examine  a  few  statistics.  The  following  are  taken  from  the  last 
official  report  of  the  Commission  of  Pensions  dated  June  30,  1891. 

1865 
1870 
1875 
1880 
1885 
1890 
1891 

Those  who  mourn  over  the  illiberality  of  our  Government  towards 
its  defenders,  may  find  some  relief  in  a  careful  study  of  the  foregoing 
figures.  If  they  still  remain  convinced  that  republics  are  ungrateful 
and  that  ours  is  particularly  so,  they  may  discover  a  ray  of  light  in  the 
following  assurance  given  by  the  Commissioner  in  his  report,  page  21 : 

"  I  desire  to  call  your  attention  to  the  reports  made  to  the  Department  dur- 
ing the  past  four  months,  showing  the  number  of  pension  certificates  issued,  the 


Total  number  of 

Amount  paid  for 

pensioners  on  roll. 

pensions. 

85,986 

$8,535,153 

198,686 

37,780,811 

234,821 

29,683,116 

250,803 

57,340,540 

345,135 

65,693,706 

537,944 

106,493,890 

676,160 

118,548,959 

\ 


.  rJ,rt-c.f\,UrJiii»!Si^/B&L 


Date  Due 

■  -    i  '^  '■! 

' 

u   l^   ^ 

i. 

•  Culi 

H 

.1.^ 

'<  sr 

r 

■     .A;UV 

(|) 

::Ji:'Mi^;i:i:i':'t':ii.|:|M||!' 


iiiiSiiiiii 


